Paste a URL and get the idea underneath your page pressure-tested: is a real problem stated, who has it, what do they do about it today, and does the page read as a solution in search of a problem.
Free, no login, no email. Nothing stored beyond a 24 hour cache. Markdown copy
Paste any URL
We load that one page — its text, its markup and a screenshot. No login and no email.
Seven tests on the idea, not the design
Is a problem actually stated. Does the page lead with a technology and reverse-engineer a use for it. Is someone specific hurt, badly. Is the current alternative acknowledged. Could you repeat the idea after one read. Is there any reason to believe this team. Does the page admit what it does not do.
Get the questions your page cannot answer
For each one, what would have to be on the page to answer it. The lens is careful to separate 'the idea might be wrong' from 'the page does not say' — it can only judge the second.
Three of the four YC lenses here are about how well the page does its job. This one asks a question that sits underneath all of them: supposing the page is clear, converts well, and has a channel — is there a problem at the bottom of it that somebody actually has?
A page can be beautifully built on top of nothing, and every other reviewer on this site will pass it. That is the specific gap this lens exists to close.
This is the tightest constraint on the whole roster and it is worth being explicit about. Properly evaluating a startup idea needs the market, the founders, the competition and a conversation. This tool has a marketing page.
So every test judges what the page CLAIMS about the problem, never whether the idea will work. “This page never states a problem” is answerable from the page and is a real finding. “This market is too small” is not answerable from the page, and a reviewer asked for it anyway would produce something confident and made up. You will not see that verdict here, and its absence is deliberate rather than an oversight.
The most reliable signal in the lens is a headline that names a technology with the problem reverse-engineered in the section below. Ideas that started from a capability and went looking for a use read a particular way, and the useful test is simple: would this page still exist, in this form, if the technology it is built on had never been invented?
Pages routinely write as though their problem is currently unsolved. The reader knows perfectly well that they solve it today — with a spreadsheet, an agency, a junior employee, or by tolerating it. A page that never acknowledges the existing alternative loses to it silently, and the team never finds out why.
Superflow is not affiliated with Y Combinator, and Jared Friedman has not reviewed your page, your idea, or endorsed this tool. This is our interpretation of talks and editorial YC published publicly, cited under every result. It does not write as him, and it will not produce a quotation.
No, on both counts. It is not him — the lens is assembled from the public record of his YC talks on getting and evaluating startup ideas, and it never writes as him or invents a quotation. And it is not evaluating your startup: it is reading one marketing page and asking what that page claims about the problem.
No login, no email, no ads. Same as this one.
Superflow agents review the pages you ship on every change, against the standards your team actually holds, and leave the findings as comments on the page itself.